Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Canucks End of Season Media Availability @ Noon

Rate this topic


Rush17

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I just fundamentally to my core believe that surrendering to another team because they're good is what a coach in the NHL should ever do. It's the NHL. It's not NHL vs CHL. It's the NHL. A league that's highly regarded to have the closest groups of teams where a last placed team can beat a first placed on any given night. And we decided because our team wasn't good enough and that because Vegas forechecked so well, that allowing them to play offense on us like it was a practice for 55 minutes 3 games in a row is a strategy that somehow leads to success. 

It's not like Green is the first coach to implement the strategy, nor will he be the last.  A good coach fashions his strategy to the team he has, adapting as he goes to what he thinks will give his team the best chance at success.  AV was a master at it, adjusting season over season as his team evolved with more experience and better players.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, skategal said:

I can see both sides of the argument here.  There is something to be gained by infusing some fresh blood into the mix, but at best it might have been one or two players, certainly not 3 - 5 as you identified.  

There is a time honoured tradition that you "dance with the one you brought to the dance" and not swap people out when it's the players in front of you that worked their tails off to get the team to that position.  

It's also reason for concern to throw players in who have no playoff experience against a strong team like Vegas when elimination is on the line.  If the team lost game 7, do those players you infused into the lineup take a disproportionate level of blame.  What if OJ or Rafferty gave up a breakaway that was scored on and the game was lost by one goal?  The media and the fans would crucify them.  None of the players you identified were likely to add scoring punch which was desperately needed.  Other than helping to clear the puck out, not sure any of the players you mentioned would have added anything much.  Remember, we lost by one goal that was scored on the goalie, the other 3 were scored on an empty net.  

We could have had a forecheck with the players you mentioned. Guys like Motte, did he not bring anything to the team? Motte was one of the few reasons we even got to game 7. Don't tell me that depth players can't affect a series. 

When you're in the playoffs, anything is on the table. You do what you need to do to win. If that means changing your goalie, changing your line ups, do it. Save the nice gestures for the regular season where you have time to correct mistakes and to fiddle around. Brian Burke always preaches this and he's right. There's no time for niceties when you're competing for the cup. 

If OJ and Rafferty cost us a series, what would have happened? Everybody would come together and go, "Well, they're young and this is a mistake a young player would make with such little experience!"? That's the worst that situation gets. They have careers ahead of them to correct things. 

I don't understand when you have one poster saying, "Vegas' forecheck was too good and we couldn't get the puck up" and then go on saying that good puck moving defensemen would have no impact or go on saying that, "hey that team's forecheck was too good, but slotting good forecheckers into our lineup would have no affect". You guys all have this losing mentality that this team can't compete. I don't expect the Canucks to win against Vegas. I think Vegas has the better team. But you might as well bring a gun to a gun fight, not a cardboard paper roll and pretend it's a giant sword. This team is good enough to compete with Vegas. This team shouldn't have beaten the Blues either but our top end skill played like top end skill and we got a bit lucky. Our top talent was stronger than theirs. That's it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, skategal said:

It's not like Green is the first coach to implement the strategy, nor will he be the last.  A good coach fashions his strategy to the team he has, adapting as he goes to what he thinks will give his team the best chance at success.  AV was a master at it, adjusting season over season as his team evolved with more experience and better players.  

There's a difference between the defensive style that AV and other defensive coaches implement to what the Canucks did. We literally had no forecheck for 55 minutes of hockey games. It's not like we were playing the trap. We didn't even do that. It looked as if we half-assed a good defensive strategy. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, guess the season for us is over and we'll never know if a different strategy would have worked differently since none of us were in the dressing room or coaches meetings.  All we have are varied opinions.  

Have a great off season, I'm sure we'll be back to challenge each other when the season starts again!  

  • Thanks 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s going to be a interesting offseason honestly. Gotta get Marky, Tanev and Toffoli re-signed. My guess is that we’ll only be able to sign two out of the three. We also need to add more size and grit to our bottom 6. It’s important to get production there which we were lacking during our playoff run. We’ve got some depth both up front and in our backend in our prospect pool. Would love to see one or two break out and surprise us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Speaking of players who showed up in the playoffs, I wonder why they haven't tried Motte in the Top 6. 

I think I saw him with bo for a couple shifts there, but in general, I think it's because green knows how to get the best out of players. put them in a position to succeed by not asking them to do more than they can handle. motter is the ultimate role player.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re-signing Tanev, Markstrom and Toffoli might just be the biggest mistake Canucks will make. People are thinking with their emotions and not logically. Tanev has a unique year where he is not injured. Markstrom is 30 years old and goalies tend to drop off after 30. Toffoli is good but his lack of foot speed is go glaring that I do not want more slow players on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bbllpp said:

Talking a player you want to move down in the media is not a good strategy for success.  Seems more of a move to keep Jakes contract down if it goes to arbitration.  
 

Seems like a move to devalue his regular season success and using the media to do it for him.

I think you are right. Reading between the lines in the context where JB brought up JV, he wants to re-sign JV but at low cost.

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, runtzguy said:

Re-signing Tanev, Markstrom and Toffoli might just be the biggest mistake Canucks will make. People are thinking with their emotions and not logically. Tanev has a unique year where he is not injured. Markstrom is 30 years old and goalies tend to drop off after 30. Toffoli is good but his lack of foot speed is go glaring that I do not want more slow players on the team.

But if we lose all 3, we are not making the playoffs next season.

 

We barely made the playoffs this season with Tanev and Markstrom playing at their best and with Toffoli replacing Boeser's production.

 

Can't afford all 3 anyways, but we gotta sign at least Tanev. Replacing a top4 RHD is going to be extremely difficult.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, FireGillis said:

I guess the myth of Jake being built for the playoffs was just that. A myth and not reality. It's true that a player like Jake should be built for the playoffs, but that requires someone with higher hockey iq and desire to compete and win.  I think Jake like Shane O'Brien is just content to be in the NHL, so he can party and chase women. 

That could very well be true.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, khay said:

But if we lose all 3, we are not making the playoffs next season.

 

We barely made the playoffs this season with Tanev and Markstrom playing at their best and with Toffoli replacing Boeser's production.

 

Can't afford all 3 anyways, but we gotta sign at least Tanev. Replacing a top4 RHD is going to be extremely difficult.

 

 

True. But we have to stop spending money on 30+ age players (I know Toffoli isn't). We should keep the money we have now and wait for other teams like Hurricanes and Tampa Bay that needs a salary dump and fetch some good and young players. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...